OT: COVID-19 Megathread III (Please limit all COVID discussion to this thread)

[czechczech]

Be a Fan - Take the Shot! It looks like Brad Paisley and "303" got together on this.



This is the way you beat the pandemic!

 

[Predsanddead24]

This is the right way to go about trying to get people to get vaccinated in my opinion. I understand it is a bit of a moving target but is incredibly disappointing to me that there hasn't been any clear communication on when things will start to look normal again. They should be clearly repeating what metrics are the goal for removing different restrictions (whether in terms of cases, vaccinations, or whatever). I know a lot of people who have no interest in the vaccine because the messaging they are hearing is that even if we all get vaccinated nothing is going to change and honestly I can't blame them based on what a lot of those in key positions are saying. The vaccines are absolutely amazing yet there seems to be a lot of messaging trying to downplay how good they are in fear of people acting recklessly once they get them.

This article talks is a couple a months old now but I found it's discussion of how well intentioned public health messaging has failed and in many cases made things worse to be very interesting. If you don't want to read the whole thing the takeaway is very good:

"Public-health authorities should also be louder and more explicit about the next steps, giving us guidelines for when we can expect easing in rules for public behavior as well. We need the exit strategy spelled out—but with graduated, targeted measures rather than a one-size-fits-all message. We need to let people know that getting a vaccine will almost immediately change their lives for the better, and why, and also when and how increased vaccination will change more than their individual risks and opportunities, and see us out of this pandemic.

We should encourage people to dream about the end of this pandemic by talking about it more, and more concretely: the numbers, hows, and whys. Offering clear guidance on how this will end can help strengthen people’s resolve to endure whatever is necessary for the moment—even if they are still unvaccinated—by building warranted and realistic anticipation of the pandemic’s end."

Fortunately it seems like this messaging is finally starting to be presented but it has taken far too long to start, I think one of the big postmortems that needs to be done moving forward by our institutions is to rethink how public health messaging is done in this country. Public health experts aren't sociologists so guidelines that make medical sense may not make practical sense when you consider how people in the real world will react to them.

 

[Datsyukian Deke]

My position has always been, for those who want the vaccine, more power to you...and do what you think is best for you in the long run, no issues with that. As for me, I already had Covid in December, and ended up spending 5 days in the ICU due to having pneumonia on top of it (which was loads of fun), therefore for me, there is no need to get one after already having it.

Besides, I'd rather those more in need of it (65 & older) be able to all have theirs with no issues of availability even coming into play.

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

The messaging is flawed because it's a singular solution. The goal is to reduce Covid inflections to a manageable level and significantly reduce the risk of death or serious illness (flu-like-level). The vaccine is a huge part of that solution but not the only one. It's perfectly logical to rely on natural immunity from previously contracting Covid. It's also logical to protect yourself by building and maintaining your own immune system. It's also logical that some people of a natural ability to ward off Covid just by the natural state of their immune system.

Many people have health risks that could be threatened by the vax. No 3rd party (Pharma, Government, etc) is going to back their messaging to get vaccinated by accepting legal liability if a person has a bad health outcome. The personal strategy to fight potential Covid infections should be left to the person. And if they chose a non-vax option, that doesn't mean it's less effective than getting the vaccine for that person.

Combine that with the incredibly low odds of having a serious Covid health risk (unless you are over 65), and you end up with a society that no longer has people dying in unusually high numbers from Covid, and without the necessity for restrictions.

The Paisley ad sets up a false choice. If you want to fill Bridgestone, you gotta get vaccinated. That's because that's the capacity policy. Bridgestone could just as easily set a date and say, we're fully open for business.

The vax messaging should be: "If you want to protect yourself from getting Covid, get vaccinated." Simple, and for most people, true. You don't need anyone else to do anything. You are taking responsibility for your health, just like we've done for thousands of years. The flip side of that message is: "If you don't get vaccinated, and you haven't taken other measures to protect yourself, then you may get Covid and have a serious outcome." So, if two people come to the Pred game and give each other Covid because they decided not to protect themselves, then they both suffer with Covid.

No one is in position to judge the health decisions of others. It wouldn't be cool to tell the obese, chain-smoking, alcohol-drinking dude who may sit next to me at the game that in order to sit next to me he has to lose weight, stop smoking at home, and stop drinking because his poor health condition is putting me at greater risk. I don't have a right to be protected from him. We both make our decisions and take responsibility for ourselves.

I'm psyched we're getting to the end of this. The only thing that will mess it up is if the powers-that-be refuse to let go and let people live normal lives with normal risks.

 

[LCPreds]

therefore for me, there is no need to get one after already having it.

Is this actually true? I know the science and what we know is constantly changing but last I remember you might have a few months of protection but nothing definitive on long term protection. I hope you’re right as that is definitely a huge positive if so.

 

[Predsanddead24]

The messaging is flawed because it's a singular solution. The goal is to reduce Covid inflections to a manageable level and significantly reduce the risk of death or serious illness (flu-like-level). The vaccine is a huge part of that solution but not the only one. It's perfectly logical to rely on natural immunity from previously contracting Covid. It's also logical to protect yourself by building and maintaining your own immune system. It's also logical that some people of a natural ability to ward off Covid just by the natural state of their immune system.

Many people have health risks that could be threatened by the vax. No 3rd party (Pharma, Government, etc) is going to back their messaging to get vaccinated by accepting legal liability if a person has a bad health outcome. The personal strategy to fight potential Covid infections should be left to the person. And if they chose a non-vax option, that doesn't mean it's less effective than getting the vaccine for that person.

Combine that with the incredibly low odds of having a serious Covid health risk (unless you are over 65), and you end up with a society that no longer has people dying in unusually high numbers from Covid, and without the necessity for restrictions.

The Paisley ad sets up a false choice. If you want to fill Bridgestone, you gotta get vaccinated. That's because that's the capacity policy. Bridgestone could just as easily set a date and say, we're fully open for business.

The vax messaging should be: "If you want to protect yourself from getting Covid, get vaccinated." Simple, and for most people, true. You don't need anyone else to do anything. You are taking responsibility for your health, just like we've done for thousands of years. The flip side of that message is: "If you don't get vaccinated, and you haven't taken other measures to protect yourself, then you may get Covid and have a serious outcome." So, if two people come to the Pred game and give each other Covid because they decided not to protect themselves, then they both suffer with Covid.

No one is in position to judge the health decisions of others. It wouldn't be cool to tell the obese, chain-smoking, alcohol-drinking dude who may sit next to me at the game that in order to sit next to me he has to lose weight, stop smoking at home, and stop drinking because his poor health condition is putting me at greater risk. I don't have a right to be protected from him. We both make our decisions and take responsibility for ourselves.

I'm psyched we're getting to the end of this. The only thing that will mess it up is if the powers-that-be refuse to let go and let people live normal lives with normal risks.

I disagree with your premise that the only negative impact of someone not getting a Covid vaccine is to themselves. The vaccines are very effective but not 100% effective and the higher the rate of virus circulating in the community the higher the risk of breakthrough infections or variants developing. It is true that I as an individual am likely nearly completely safe from Covid after being vaccinated but on a population scale there are plenty of concerns about not doing everything we can to more rapidly stop the spread of the disease and widespread vaccination is the number way to stop it. The risk presented by the vaccines are order of magnitudes lower relative to any risk relative from getting Covid so the public health agencies should be promoting this fact and encouraging everyone to get it. I understand there are individuals who have health concerns that prohibit them from getting or make them skeptical of the vaccine and those people should consult with their doctor. Like you mention there is also nuance for those who have already have Covid due to them acquiring natural immunity, but there are still benefits to them as well such as lower risk of catching Covid again. I'm not advocating for public shaming of those who are unsure about getting the vaccine (which is unfortunately the avenue many want to go) as I think that is counterproductive, but health organizations should absolutely be putting out PSA's advocating for everyone to get them and highlighting their safety and the societal benefits vaccination provides.

It's also worth noting that children still are not eligible vaccine so lowering community spread through vaccination of adults lowers the risk of getting coronavirus for them. For all the consternation about how we do not know the long term effects of the vaccine on things like reproductive health we know equally as little about the long term implications of children getting Covid and the impacts that will have on their development or reproductive health. It's one of those things I find very bizarre from the narratives of those pushing back against mass vaccinations programs since they so heavily push the possible risks of vaccinations that don't immediately manifest but largely ignore the potential for risks from Covid that aren't immediately apparent. While the risks to children of dying or getting a severe disease are low they are not non-existent so shouldn't we as a society be doing everything we can to make sure the risk to them is basically zero?

We as a society always have to balance the freedoms of the individual with the risk their actions present to the rest of our society. It is why in your example about sitting next to the obese, chain smoking, alcoholic at the hockey game we don't let him smoke while he's sitting next to you or get drunk and drive himself home after the game. While the individual risks of those actions having an long term negative impact on the guy sitting next to him at the game (i.e. developing lung cancer or being hit by the drunk guy on his drive home) are low they are high enough that we don't let the obese chain smoking guy do whatever he wants. I also think the risks at the society level should be proportional to the benefits those activities provide. I'm looking forward to getting to go to a packed house sporting event or a live concert but they really aren't activities that are necessary for a society to function. Let's open schools, get local businesses operating at full capacity, and have shows at the local venue and make sure we don't cause new outbreaks before we dive headfirst into something like packing a full house into Bridgestone Arena.

We still have had around 750 people dying a day from Covid over the last week which is something like 10% of the deaths in the United States per day. Hopefully we will see the same thing happen in the US as is happening in Israel where deaths and cases drop dramatically in the near future. I'm with you on your general idea of making a clearly defined plan to reopen but it should be based on metrics where we know we have the disease under control not arbitrarily selected end dates like you advocated for in your previous post.

 

[bdub24]

Amazing the lack of awareness to on one hand say Covid is low mortality so dont worry while justifying avoiding getting vaccinated due to an even lower level of medical risks to the shots. Simply unbelievable.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Is this actually true? I know the science and what we know is constantly changing but last I remember you might have a few months of protection but nothing definitive on long term protection. I hope you’re right as that is definitely a huge positive if so.

Most recent paper I saw was the SIREN study in England that showed those previously infected had an 84% lower chance of infection and a 93% lower chance of symptomatic infection up to seven months after initial infection. Here's a brief write up about it that links to the original study too. As noted by Dr. Krammer at the end of the article that puts it on the order of the protection you get from the vaccine. It's also worth noting his comment that we still don't really have an understanding of which immune response cells are actually most important for fighting Covid so the whole question of immunity is still largely based on observational studies. There is also some evidence to suggest that those who had Covid have a better antibody response after a single vaccine dose than those who didn't have Covid had after two doses. That result isn't that shocking given that is kind of the whole idea behind having a two dose series, but it does have some important implications for how to best allocate vaccines in a vaccine scarcity situation. Granted that isn't the situation in the US anymore.

 

[adsfan]

Most recent paper I saw was the SIREN study in England that showed those previously infected had an 84% lower chance of infection and a 93% lower chance of symptomatic infection up to seven months after initial infection. Here's a brief write up about it that links to the original study too. As noted by Dr. Krammer at the end of the article that puts it on the order of the protection you get from the vaccine. It's also worth noting his comment that we still don't really have an understanding of which immune response cells are actually most important for fighting Covid so the whole question of immunity is still largely based on observational studies. There is also some evidence to suggest that those who had Covid have a better antibody response after a single vaccine dose than those who didn't have Covid had after two doses. That result isn't that shocking given that is kind of the whole idea behind having a two dose series, but it does have some important implications for how to best allocate vaccines in a vaccine scarcity situation. Granted that isn't the situation in the US anymore.

This is why I am upset that the J&J vaccine is being touted as "blood clot city" when you have literally a 1 in a million chance of having that side effect. I had the J&J and would do it again. It is worth the minimal risk to me.

The odds of being hit by lightning in the US is 1 in 15,300 assuming that you live to be 80 years old. People still go outside even though you are 65 times more likely to be hit by lightning than get a blood clot from J&J.

My big concern is that variants of COVID-19 might infect people who had the original strain in a year or so when their immunity could be reduced. We may end up taking a yearly shot much like for the flu. Note: That is just my opinion and not based on any scientific facts that I have read or heard.

chance of being struck by lightning - Google Search

 

[PredsV82]

My position has always been, for those who want the vaccine, more power to you...and do what you think is best for you in the long run, no issues with that. As for me, I already had Covid in December, and ended up spending 5 days in the ICU due to having pneumonia on top of it (which was loads of fun), therefore for me, there is no need to get one after already having it.

Besides, I'd rather those more in need of it (65 & older) be able to all have theirs with no issues of availability even coming into play.

You do still need the vaccine. We dont know how long immunity after infection lasts. We do know people can get COVID a second time. We also know the vaccine produces a substantially stronger immune response than actual infection. I agree you dont need to be beating down the doors to get yours right this minute but later this summer when most everyone has had one you should get it. You certainly wouldnt want a repeat of your previous illness.

 

[PredsV82]

The messaging is flawed because it's a singular solution. The goal is to reduce Covid inflections to a manageable level and significantly reduce the risk of death or serious illness (flu-like-level). The vaccine is a huge part of that solution but not the only one. It's perfectly logical to rely on natural immunity from previously contracting Covid. It's also logical to protect yourself by building and maintaining your own immune system. It's also logical that some people of a natural ability to ward off Covid just by the natural state of their immune system.

This is just wrong. You say it with conviction in the hope of being convincing but it's wrong. The ultimate goal of vaccination is to deprive COVID of a vector to continue to propagate and, more alarmingly, continue to mutate. This is accomplished by making the population immune to infection, not just able to survive it without serious consequences.

Many people have health risks that could be threatened by the vax. FALSE, please support this statement with evidence. No 3rd party (Pharma, Government, etc) is going to back their messaging to get vaccinated by accepting legal liability if a person has a bad health outcome. The personal strategy to fight potential Covid infections should be left to the person. And if they chose a non-vax option, that doesn't mean it's less effective than getting the vaccine for that person. Again, FALSE/misleading/irrelevant




Combine that with the incredibly low odds of having a serious Covid health risk (unless you are over 65), and you end up with a society that no longer has people dying in unusually high numbers from Covid, and without the necessity for restrictions.

The Paisley ad sets up a false choice. If you want to fill Bridgestone, you gotta get vaccinated. That's because that's the capacity policy. Bridgestone could just as easily set a date and say, we're fully open for business.

The vax messaging should be: "If you want to protect yourself from getting Covid, get vaccinated." Simple, and for most people, true. You don't need anyone else to do anything. You are taking responsibility for your health, just like we've done for thousands of years. The flip side of that message is: "If you don't get vaccinated, and you haven't taken other measures to protect yourself, then you may get Covid and have a serious outcome." So, if two people come to the Pred game and give each other Covid because they decided not to protect themselves, then they both suffer with Covid.

Funny how you talk about legal risk/ramifications and how they affect corporate decision making and yet you fail to consider that the Preds/Bridgestone may not be willing to take the risk of being held liable if someone catches COVID at a game because they decided to just say "screw it, we are open for business"

 

[triggrman]

They don’t know how many people have bad side effects yet

 

[LCPreds]

They don’t know how many people have bad side effects yet

How long do we wait to find out?

 

[triggrman]

How long do we wait to find out?

Don’t know. We’re getting ours Friday and will hope there’s no problem.

 

[PredsV82]

They don’t know how many people have bad side effects yet

The statement that was blatantly false was "Many people have health risks that could be threatened by the vax"

This is an unequivocally false statement.

 

[triggrman]

The statement that was blatantly false was "Many people have health risks that could be threatened by the vax"

This is an unequivocally false statement.

And I’m saying it could be right, they don’t know.

 

[PredsV82]

And I’m saying it could be right, they don’t know.

No, that's not how it works. That's not how any of this works..... they didnt pull this out of their ass and start injecting people. There are not "many people with conditions that could be harmed by the vax". If there are, then name those conditions.

 

[triggrman]

No, that's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.....

So you’re saying they understand every health risk and it’s reaction?

 

[PredsV82]

So you’re saying they understand every health risk and it’s reaction?

Im saying they understand the mechanism.of actions the vaccine and what it makes the body do. They understand how that process could potentially affect human homeostasis. And they have given it to thousands of people during testing and now tens of millions of people around the world.

Is there a possibility for a rare/weird complication? Of course there is. They have found that the J/J and AZ vaccines can, in very rare cases(like, less than one in a million) cause the body to produce antibodies to what's called platelet factor 4, and that leads to the few cases of clots that have emerged lately. But that's a far cry from "many people have conditions...." because they just dont...

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

Until we have a longer period of time to experience the benefits and risks of the vax, we can't know the outcomes for sure. If we did, the vax would be fully approved for use instead of for emergency use only. Until there's more tests involving pregnant women, or women would take the vax and then get pregnant later, you don't have enough data to know with certainty the outcomes for that group. Conversely, those same risks apply from getting Covid. So, most people will decide the risks of the vax are much smaller than the risks of getting Covid and getting sick, so they will take the vax. I hope they all do.

That said, it's still up to each person and their doctor, because the outcomes (good or bad) will be experienced by the person, not the public in general.

The most exciting outcome of the vax was the ability to protect yourself from Covid and go back to a normal life, interacting with other people. So far, we're telling people to mask-up and distance, even post-vax. Either the vax works or it doesn't. There is always some virus risk in living your life around other people. Maintaining restrictions to cover the possibility of a small percentage of post-vax infections may not be in our overall best interests, imo. There is more to life than not-getting-Covid (although I'll do reasonable things to avoid it).

I'm glad I'm vaxed and I'm ready to be around others, whether they are vaxed or not. We have to keep the odds of getting seriously sick in perspective.

For example, a pro athlete has a greater chance of getting hurt in a car accident on the way to practice, than he/she does of getting seriously sick with Covid. Yet we haven't taken their keys away. And they can hurt other people in those car accidents.

Lers get vaxed and drop the puck.

 

[Datsyukian Deke]

Is this actually true? I know the science and what we know is constantly changing but last I remember you might have a few months of protection but nothing definitive on long term protection. I hope you’re right as that is definitely a huge positive if so.

The numbers of re-infections have been virtually non-existent, if they weren't, I'm certain we'd be hearing of record numbers of those on a nightly basis, indeed.

You do still need the vaccine. We dont know how long immunity after infection lasts. We do know people can get COVID a second time. We also know the vaccine produces a substantially stronger immune response than actual infection. I agree you dont need to be beating down the doors to get yours right this minute but later this summer when most everyone has had one you should get it. You certainly wouldnt want a repeat of your previous illness.

With the numbers of such being as low as they are, I'll take my chances, but I thank you, nevertheless!

 

[NoNecksCurse]

my biggest problem with all this is that it’s not even really “people making the best decisions for themselves and their families”. a person’s opinions on covid and vaccines will primarily fall right down party lines. i put that on the politicians and we all know the person that is the biggest blame for that. this should never have been political and that’s all it is at this point.

(i realize you are an outlier trigg and have your own opinions on the subject. i respect your viewpoints 100% and would no way force my beliefs upon you).

 

[predfan24]

With the numbers of such being as low as they are, I'll take my chances, but I thank you, nevertheless!

The numbers are low compared to the disaster that was winter/holidays, but they aren't low in general.

I haven't seen any updates regarding how many cases are being missed on a daily basis, but if they are still around what the previous projection was (we'll say 3x the reported number) there is still well over 100K infections daily in the U.S.

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that is not under control.

 

[PredsV82]

iliili I do appreciate your last sentence.
Ultimately, that's gonna be the path back to normalcy, because with widespread vaccination, the case counts should drop dramatically, and that's when you're going to have both the government and corporate america comfortable saying "game on, back to normal". Look at how disastrous things are in Ontario where supply issues have hampered vaccination efforts. They are at the point of rationing ventilators again. They are shutting down everything up there. They wont open back up until their numbers drop drastically and the only way that will happen is widespread vaccination

And of course on an individual level, the decision should be made with input from your own doctor, who knows you better than anyone else.

 

[predfan24]

That being said with vaccinations available to everyone now things are looking up and I'm ecstatic about the warm months coming. COVID isn't going away but the vaccines should enable us to live normally again.